Regina v Manai [2011] SBHC 77; HCSI-CRC 100 of 2011 (26 August 2011)

HIGH COURT OF SOLOMON ISLANDS
(PALMER CJ.)

Criminal Case Number 100 of 2011

REGINA

V

BEN MANAI

HEARING: 17 August 2011
SENTENCE: 26 August 2011

N. Kesaka for the Crown
S. Kalu for the Defendant

Palmer CJ.:

You have pleaded guilty to a charge of rape. This is a serious offence with a maximum sentence of up to life imprisonment.

I give credit for a guilty plea, that you have no previous convictions and that this is your first brush with the law. I note that you have a large family of five young children, with age range from 2–12 years, plus one adopted child and a very old mother (90 years old) that you look after and who are dependent on you. This sentence of imprisonment will adversely affect them but that is not normally a matter which can be taken into account[1] unless an unusual measure of hardship[2] as a result of your imprisonment is shown.

I note that you are self employed, that you earn a living by selling copra, at times selling fish and garden produce at the local market at Marau station.

I note this incident appears to be a spur of the moment act; that you now realize on hindsight the error of your actions and regret what you have done. I note you cooperated with the Police in their investigations, that there seems to be willingness on the part of the victim's family and relatives for reconciliation and so prospects of rehabilitation are good. This will pave the way for re-acceptance and re-settlement back into your community; likelihood of re-offending to that extent is low. I note that while in Prison you have involved yourself in worthwhile pursuits, including Bible Study and that you have indicated willingness to reform.

These mitigating factors however must be balanced with the seriousness of the offence, the prevalence of this type of offence in the community especially in recent years and after the ethnic tension that the country has gone through, the community disquiet of this type of offence reflecting gender sensitivities, imbalances and distortions, which target girls and women folk, bearing in mind that they are the weaker vessel and therefore a vulnerable group in the community, and the need to protect as well as deter any like-minded persons from committing such a crime in the future. Girls and women in the rural areas should be able to go to their gardens freely without fear of being attacked and assaulted by members of the opposite sex.

You took advantage of a chance meeting alone in the bush with the victim and sought to entice her to have sex with you. In spite of and despite of her refusing your advances and remonstrating with you to think rationally, even to the extent of walking away, you persisted, followed her and used force to subdue her and then raped her. You abused your strength to achieve an unlawful end. Your strength is supposed to be used to protect and serve your wife, children and other members of the community, not to subdue a 'strange' woman to satisfy your lust. In so doing you have acted in such an inhuman and degrading manner, caused much pain and agony to many people; for some this will remain with them for a long time, in particular the victim who continues to suffer mental and emotional anguish from this incident, even to the extent of trying to take her own life. I note the victim sustained some bruising to her private part as a result of the force and violence used to effect penetration. As well she has been traumatized as a consequence of having been subjected to such indignity and threatened.

I have had the opportunity to consider various sentences that have been imposed in other cases and thank counsels for providing me with those case authorities in their written submissions to assist me in reaching the appropriate sentence that I consider should be imposed in this case. Balancing everything, it is my considered view that a sentence of four years is appropriate in this case.

Orders of the Court:

1. Convict the defendant of the offence of rape.
   
2. Impose sentence of four years.
   
3. Period spent in custody to be taken into account.
   

The Court.

---

^[1] R. v. Ingham October 3, 1974, per Lord Widgery CJ, Lawton LJ, Dunn J.
^[2] R. v. Crompton, July 22, 1974, per Lawton LJ, Nield and Cantley JJ.